DOCSLIB.ORG

For Determination of Non-Regulated Status for Innate™ Potatoes With

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
For Determination of Non-Regulated Status for Innate™ Potatoes With J.R. Simplot Company Petition (13-022-01p) for Determination of Non-Regulated Status for Innate™ Potatoes with Low Acrylamide Potential and Reduced Black Spot Bruise: Events E12 and E24 (Russet Burbank); F10 and F37 (Ranger Russet); J3, J55, and J78 (Atlantic); G11 (G); H37 and H50 (H) OECD Unique Identifiers: SPS-00F10-7; SPS-00F37-7; SPS-0E12-8; SPS-00E24-2; SPS-000J3-4; SPS-00J55-2; SPS-00J78-7; SPS-00G11-9; SPS-00H37-9; SPS-00H50-4 Draft Environmental Assessment March 2014 Agency Contact Cindy Eck Biotechnology Regulatory Services 4700 River Road USDA, APHIS Riverdale, MD 20737 Fax: (301) 734-8669 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’S TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Mention of companies or commercial products in this report does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture over others not mentioned. USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of any product mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to report factually on available data and to provide specific information. This publication reports research involving pesticides. All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies before they can be recommended. i TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PURPOSE AND NEED .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The APHIS Regulatory Authority ........................................................................ 1 1.1.1 Purpose of this Product ................................................................................. 2 1.2 Coordinated Regulatory Framework for Genetically-Engineered Organisms ..... 3 1.2.1 USDA-APHIS .................................................................................................... 3 1.2.1 Environmental Protection Agency ................................................................ 3 1.2.2 Food and Drug Administration ..................................................................... 4 1.3 Purpose and Need for This APHIS Action........................................................... 5 1.3.1 Public Involvement ............................................................................................ 5 1.3.2 Public Involvement Approach for This EA ....................................................... 7 1.4 Issues Considered ..................................................................................................... 7 2 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................. 9 2.1 Agricultural Production and Agronomic Practices of Potato ............................... 9 2.2.1 Land Use ............................................................................................................ 9 2.2.2 General Agronomic Practices .......................................................................... 12 2.3 Physical Environment............................................................................................. 20 2.3.1 Water Resources .............................................................................................. 20 2.3.2 Soil Quality ...................................................................................................... 22 2.3.3 Air Quality ....................................................................................................... 23 2.3.4 Climate Change ................................................................................................ 24 2.4 Biological Resources .............................................................................................. 25 2.4.1 Animal Communities ....................................................................................... 25 2.4.2 Plant Communities ........................................................................................... 26 2.4.3 Gene Flow and Weediness ............................................................................... 26 2.4.4 Microorganisms ............................................................................................... 28 2.1.1 2.2.5 Biodiversity ........................................................................................ 30 2.2 30 2.2.1 2.2.6 Human Health .................................................................................... 30 2.2.7 Animal Feed ..................................................................................................... 34 2.3 Socioeconomics ...................................................................................................... 35 2.3.1 Domestic Economic Environment ................................................................... 36 2.3.2 Trade Economic Environment ......................................................................... 39 2.3.3 Organically Certified Economic Environment ................................................ 39 3. ALTERNATIVES......................................................................................................... 41 3.1 No Action Alternative: Continuation as a Regulated Article ................................ 41 i TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE (Continued) 3.2 Preferred Alternative: Determination That Simplot Innate™ Potato Is No Longer a Regulated Article ............................................................................................... 42 3.3 Alternatives Considered But Rejected from Further Consideration ...................... 42 3.3.1 Prohibit Any Simplot Innate™ Potato from Being Released .......................... 42 3.3.2 Approve the Petition in Part ............................................................................. 43 3.3.3 Isolation Distance between Simplot Innate™ Potato and Non-GE Potato Production and Geographical Restrictions ................................................. 43 3.3.4 Requirement of Testing for Simplot Innate™ Potato ...................................... 44 3.4 Comparison of Alternatives ................................................................................ 44 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................................................................... 50 4.1 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................ 50 4.2 Scope of Analysis ................................................................................................... 50 4.3 Agricultural Production of Potato .......................................................................... 50 4.3.1 Acreage and Area of Potato Production ........................................................... 50 4.2.2 Agronomic Practices ........................................................................................ 51 4.2.3 Potato Seed Production .................................................................................... 52 4.2.4 Organic Potato Production ............................................................................... 52 4.3 Physical Environment............................................................................................. 54 4.3.1 Water Resources .............................................................................................. 54 4.3.2 Soil Quality ...................................................................................................... 54 4.3.3 Air Quality ....................................................................................................... 55 4.3.4 Climate Change ................................................................................................ 56 4.4. Biological Resources ............................................................................................. 56 4.4.1 Animal Communities ....................................................................................... 56 4.4.2 Plant Communities ........................................................................................... 59 4.4.3 Gene Flow and Weediness ............................................................................... 60 4.4.4 Microorganisms ............................................................................................... 60 4.4.5 Biodiversity ...................................................................................................... 61 4.4.6 Human Health .................................................................................................. 61 4.4. 7 Animal Feed .................................................................................................... 63 4.5 Socioeconomic Impacts .......................................................................................... 64 4.5.1 Domestic Economic Environment ................................................................... 64 4.5.2 Trade
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Morphological Systematics of the Nightshade Flea Beetles Epitrix
    Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 8-2016 Morphological Systematics of the Nightshade Flea Beetles Epitrix Foudras and Acallepitrix Bechyné (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Galerucinae: Alticini) in America North of Mexico Anthony Martin Deczynski Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Recommended Citation Deczynski, Anthony Martin, "Morphological Systematics of the Nightshade Flea Beetles Epitrix Foudras and Acallepitrix Bechyné (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Galerucinae: Alticini) in America North of Mexico" (2016). All Theses. 2479. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/2479 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MORPHOLOGICAL SYSTEMATICS OF THE NIGHTSHADE FLEA BEETLES EPITRIX FOUDRAS AND ACALLEPITRIX BECHYNÉ (COLEOPTERA: CHRYSOMELIDAE: GALERUCINAE: ALTICINI) IN AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Entomology by Anthony Martin Deczynski August 2016 Accepted by: Dr. Michael Caterino, Committee Chair Dr. Peter Adler Dr. J. Antonio Baeza ABSTRACT The flea beetle genera Epitrix and Acallepitrix are revised for America North of Mexico, building on a prior preliminary revision of the genus Epitrix by the author (Deczynski 2014). Four new species are described: Epitrix cuprea sp. nov., E. rileyi sp. nov., E. latifrons sp. nov., and E. vasinoda sp. nov., bringing the North American Epitrix fauna to a total of 26 species. A key is provided to adults of all species.
    [Show full text]
  • Sayıt Mahmut Erdoğan
    T.C. GIDA TARIM VE HAYVANCILIK BAKANLI ĞI Ü Ü Ğ AB UZMANLIK TEZ İ DÜNYA’DA GDO MEVZUATI, TİCARET İ VE UYGULAMALARININ KAR ŞILA ŞTIRILMASI VE TÜRK İYE LER GENEL MÜDÜRLÜ LER GENEL İ AB UZMAN YARDIMCISI (Kalın,16 Punto) K İŞ SAYIT MAHMUT ERDO ĞAN (Kalın,Punto) L İ Ş DANI ŞMAN VE DI VE Prof. Dr. MAH İNUR S. AKKAYA İĞİ ODTÜ FEN EDEB İYAT FAKÜLTES İ ÖĞRET İM ÜYES İ RL İ Ankara Eylül 2015 B AVRUPA T.C. GIDA TARIM VE HAYVANCILIK BAKANLI ĞI Avrupa Birli ği ve Dı ş İli şkiler Genel Müdürlü ğü DÜNYA’DA GDO MEVZUATI, TİCARET İ VE UYGULAMALARININ KAR ŞILA ŞTIRILMASI VE TÜRK İYE AB UZMANLIK TEZ İ SAYIT MAHMUT ERDO ĞAN AB UZMAN YARDIMCISI DANI ŞMAN Prof. Dr. MAH İNUR S. AKKAYA ODTÜ FEN EDEB İYAT FAKÜLTES İ ÖĞRET İM ÜYES İ Ankara – 2015 Eylül i ii ÖZET AB Uzmanlık Tezi DÜNYA’DA GDO MEVZUATI, T İCARET İ VE UYGULAMALARININ KAR ŞILA ŞTIRILMASI VE TÜRK İYE Sayıt Mahmut ERDO ĞAN Danı şman Prof. Dr. Mahinur S. AKKAYA Biyoteknoloji, 20. Yüzyılın sonlarından itibaren sağlık, tarım ve çevre gibi alanlar ba şta olmak üzere birçok farklı alanda de ğişim ve dönü şüm meydana getirmi ş olan modern bir disiplindir. Bu disiplin, moleküler biyoloji ve genetik mühendisli ğinin araçlarını kullanılarak canlıların genetik yapılarını belirli bir amaca yönelik olarak de ğiştirip geneti ği de ğiştirilmi ş organizmaları (GDO’lar) elde ederek insanlı ğın ihtiyacına sunmu ştur. Günümüzde bir yandan, insanlar ve hayvanlar için ilaç ve a şı çe şitleri ilaç biyoteknolojisi vasıtasıyla üretilmekte iken, di ğer yandan da tarımsal biyoteknoloji vasıtasıyla üretilmi ş olan; böceklere dirençli, herbisit toleransına sahip, besin de ğeri zenginle ştirilmi ş, kuraklı ğa ve tuzlulu ğa dirençli geneti ği de ğiştirilmi ş (GD) bitki çe şitlerinin ekimi yapılmaktadır.
    [Show full text]
  • Flea Beetles (Order: Coleoptera, Family: Chrysomelidae/Alticinae) Tobacco (Epitrix Hirtipennis (Melsheimer)) Southern Tobacco (
    Flea beetles (Order: Coleoptera, Family: Chrysomelidae/Alticinae) Tobacco (Epitrix hirtipennis (Melsheimer)) Southern tobacco (Epitrix fasciata (Blatchley)) Pale striped (Systena blanda (Melsheimer)) Description: Adult: The tobacco and southern tobacco flea beetle adults are small (1.4- 2.2 mm in length) and reddish, yellow brown, with a brown patch across the width of the elytra. The southern tobacco adult is slightly smaller and wider than the tobacco flea beetle. The pale striped flea beetle adult is larger (3.0- 4.3 mm long) and has a pair of pale yellow stripes lengthwise down the back, one stripe on each elytron. Immature stages: All of the above species have three larval instars that are whitish with darker heads, and all feed on fine roots near the soil surface or occasionally tunnel into larger roots. The tobacco flea beetle larvae range Tobacco flea beetle adult. from 1 mm after hatching to 4.2 mm at maturity, while the pale stripe larvae range from 1 to 11 mm. Biology: Life cycle: Tobacco flea beetle females can lay up to 200 eggs which hatch in 6- 8 days. The larval development typically lasts from 16-20 days under warm conditions. The last instar larva forms a small cell in the soil where it pupates, and the adult emerges 4-5 days later for a total of 26-33 days. The pale striped flea beetle requires a longer time to develop from egg to adult, 28-54 days total. Seasonal distribution: There are 3-4 generations of the tobacco flea beetles per year. High numbers have been observed in south Georgia in late June in Solanaceous crop transplants, and we think that this is likely a second generation.
    [Show full text]
  • Simplot's IT and Business Teams Partner up to Improve Data Management, Traceability, Efficiency and Response Time
    AgGateway Case Studies Simplot’s IT and Business Teams Partner Up To Improve Data Management, Traceability, Efficiency and Response Time Background Key Points The J.R. Simplot Company is one of the largest privately held food and Thousands of hours a year agribusiness companies in the saved in staff time to nation. It pioneers innovations in communicate quantity, plant nutrition and food processing, confirming pricing and terms, researches new ways to feed animals etc. This time is now devoted to and sustain ecosystems, and strives other innovative solutions for the to feed a growing global population. company. The company is headquartered in 50% reduction in response time Boise, Idaho, but does business in sending purchase orders to around the globe. There are major vendors. operations in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand and China, with products marketed in more than 40 countries worldwide. Significant reduction in restocking fees or charges for Challenges wrong items. While corporate-wide Simplot has automated many of its business processes with trading partners (such as ordering, ship notices and Reduced overall cost of doing business with partners. invoicing) the agri-business area is more complex; about 20 vendors are now connected with the company but dozens more will be brought on Reduced paper usage by 25%, electronically in the future. by eliminating 1,700 pieces of As these connections are made, it is essential for the IT and business paper a year and the cost to fax departments to work together so that the solution works for the /email each in the distribution of business; in the past the IT department was almost solely responsible purchasing information.
    [Show full text]
  • Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a Resource for Taxonomy and Biodiversity Conservation in the Mediterranean Region
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 597:Barcoding 27–38 (2016) Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation... 27 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.597.7241 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation in the Mediterranean Region Giulia Magoga1,*, Davide Sassi2, Mauro Daccordi3, Carlo Leonardi4, Mostafa Mirzaei5, Renato Regalin6, Giuseppe Lozzia7, Matteo Montagna7,* 1 Via Ronche di Sopra 21, 31046 Oderzo, Italy 2 Centro di Entomologia Alpina–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy 3 Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona, lungadige Porta Vittoria 9, 37129 Verona, Italy 4 Museo di Storia Naturale di Milano, Corso Venezia 55, 20121 Milano, Italy 5 Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources–University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran 6 Dipartimento di Scienze per gli Alimenti, la Nutrizione e l’Ambiente–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy 7 Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie e Ambientali–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy Corresponding authors: Matteo Montagna ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Santiago-Blay | Received 20 November 2015 | Accepted 30 January 2016 | Published 9 June 2016 http://zoobank.org/4D7CCA18-26C4-47B0-9239-42C5F75E5F42 Citation: Magoga G, Sassi D, Daccordi M, Leonardi C, Mirzaei M, Regalin R, Lozzia G, Montagna M (2016) Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation in the Mediterranean Region. In: Jolivet P, Santiago-Blay J, Schmitt M (Eds) Research on Chrysomelidae 6. ZooKeys 597: 27–38. doi: 10.3897/ zookeys.597.7241 Abstract The Mediterranean Region is one of the world’s biodiversity hot-spots, which is also characterized by high level of endemism.
    [Show full text]
  • Flea Beetles
    Problem: Flea Beetles Hosts: Watermelons, pumpkins, peas, beans, eggplants, sweet potatoes, beets, spinach, strawberries and potatoes. Description: "Flea beetle" is a generic name applied to many species of small jumping beetles commonly seen early in the gardening season. Some species are general feeders while others have a more restricted host range. All flea beetle life stages are completed underground. Only the adults are commonly seen by gardeners and vegetable producers. Flea beetles may be somewhat elongate to oval in shape, and vary in color, pattern, and size. For instance, potato flea beetles (Epitrix cucumeris) tend to be more oval, blackish, and about 1/16-inch long. Striped flea beetles (Phyllotreta striolata) are more elongate and dark with yellowish crooked stripes, and measure about 1/12-inch long. Spinach flea beetles (Disonycha xanthomelaena) are both oval and elongate. They have a black head, antennae and legs. The collar behind the head is yellow to yellowish-orange. Wing covers have blackish-blue luster. They approach 1/5 inch in body length. With most species of flea beetle, the adults overwinter underground or beneath plant debris. During April and May, they become active, mate, and deposit eggs. Egg laying varies depending upon species. Some deposit individual eggs while others deposit them in clusters. Egg sites may be in soil, on leaves, on leaf petioles, or within holes chewed into stems. Eggs typically hatch in 10 days. Larval and pupal development take place during the summer. "New" adults emerge and feed during late summer and fall before seeking overwintering sites. Larvae feeding on underground portions of plants may result in decreased plant vigor.
    [Show full text]
  • Flea Beetles
    E-74-W Vegetable Insects Department of Entomology FLEA BEETLES Rick E. Foster and John L. Obermeyer, Extension Entomologists Several species of fl ea beetles are common in Indiana, sometimes causing damage so severe that plants die. Flea beetles are small, hard-shelled insects, so named because their enlarged hind legs allow them to jump like fl eas from plants when disturbed. They usually move by walking or fl ying, but when alarmed they can jump a considerable distance. Most adult fl ea beetle damage is unique in appearance. They feed by chewing a small hole (often smaller than 1/8 inch) in a leaf, moving a short distance, then chewing another hole and so on. The result looks like a number of “shot holes” in the leaf. While some of the holes may meet, very often they do not. A major exception to this characteristic type of damage is that caused by the corn fl ea beetle, which eats the plant tissue forming narrow lines in the corn leaf surface. This damage gives plants a greyish appearance. Corn fl ea beetle damage on corn leaf (Photo Credit: John Obermeyer) extent of damage is realized. Therefore, it is very important to regularly check susceptible plants, especially when they are in the seedling stage. Most species of fl ea beetles emerge from hibernation in late May and feed on weeds and other plants, if hosts are not available. In Indiana, some species have multiple generations per year, and some have only one. Keeping fi elds free of weed hosts will help reduce fl ea beetle populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List
    Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List Associated Tables The Texas Priority Species List……………..733 Introduction For many years the management and conservation of wildlife species has focused on the individual animal or population of interest. Many times, directing research and conservation plans toward individual species also benefits incidental species; sometimes entire ecosystems. Unfortunately, there are times when highly focused research and conservation of particular species can also harm peripheral species and their habitats. Management that is focused on entire habitats or communities would decrease the possibility of harming those incidental species or their habitats. A holistic management approach would potentially allow species within a community to take care of themselves (Savory 1988); however, the study of particular species of concern is still necessary due to the smaller scale at which individuals are studied. Until we understand all of the parts that make up the whole can we then focus more on the habitat management approach to conservation. Species Conservation In terms of species diversity, Texas is considered the second most diverse state in the Union. Texas has the highest number of bird and reptile taxon and is second in number of plants and mammals in the United States (NatureServe 2002). There have been over 600 species of bird that have been identified within the borders of Texas and 184 known species of mammal, including marine species that inhabit Texas’ coastal waters (Schmidly 2004). It is estimated that approximately 29,000 species of insect in Texas take up residence in every conceivable habitat, including rocky outcroppings, pitcher plant bogs, and on individual species of plants (Riley in publication).
    [Show full text]
  • Steam System Efficiency Optimized After J.R. Simplot Fertilizer Plant Receives Energy Assessment; Industrial Technologies Progra
    Industrial Technologies Program Case Study The J.R. Simplot Don plant in Pocatello, Idaho, repaired boiler feed water pumps such as the one pictured above, and revised boiler operating practices to reduce steam venting by 17 million pounds annually. Steam System Efficiency Optimized After J.R. Simplot Fertilizer Plant Receives Energy Assessment Benefits Key Findings Summary • Significant energy savings can be achieved without The J.R. Simplot company’s Don Plant in Pocatello, large capital expenditures. Idaho, received a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Implemented $335,000 • While the J.R. Simplot company had an active energy Save Energy Now assessment in 2006. The main in annual energy management program, the Save Energy Now objectives of the assessment were to help the plant assessment provided fresh insights that led to new operate more efficiently by identifying ways to reduce cost savings energy savings opportunities. energy use in its steam system. Working with the • By improving boiler operation, recovering more facility’s maintenance engineers, DOE Energy Expert condensate, and repairing steam traps and leaks, the Bill Moir of Steam Engineering Inc., utilized DOE’s Saved 75,000 MMBtu in plant achieved significant energy savings. Steam System Assessment Tool (SSAT) software to annual fuel use • Once the significance of one energy-saving measure identify multiple energy savings opportunities in the is understood, additional measures are likely to be plant’s steam system. By capitalizing on several of implemented. these opportunities, plant personnel were able to Achieved a simple improve steam system efficiency and reduce energy consumption. payback of 6.5 months Applications Steam systems are widespread in fertilizer plants and Plant personnel began implementing some of the can account for a significant amount of end use energy recommendations as soon as the assessment was consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Michigan Potato Research Report
    MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION IN COOPERATION WITH THE MICHIGAN POTATO INDUSTRY COMMISSION 2004 MICHIGAN POTATO RESEARCH REPORT Photo on Left Left to Right: Ben Kudwa, First Last, First Last, First Last, Senator Alan Cropsey, First Last, First Last Volume 36 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………. 1 2004 POTATO BREEDING AND GENETICS RESEARCH REPORT David S. Douches, J. Coombs, K. Zarka, S. Copper, L. Frank, J. Driscoll and E. Estelle…………………………………………. 5 2004 POTATO VARIETY EVALUATIONS D. S. Douches, J. Coombs, L. Frank, J. Driscoll, J. Estelle, K. Zarka, R. Hammerschmidt, and W. Kirk…………………..….……...… 18 MANAGEMENT PROFILE FOR NEW POTATO VARIETIES AND LINES DECEMBER 2004 Sieg S. Snapp, Chris M. Long, Dave S. Douches, and Kitty O’Neil…...….. 50 2004 ON-FARM POTATO VARIETY TRIALS Chris Long, Dr. Dave Douches, Fred Springborn (Montcalm), Dave Glenn (Presque Isle) and Dr. Doo-Hong Min (Upper Peninsula)..…... 56 SEED TREATMENT, IN-FURROW AND SEED PLUS FOLIAR TREATMENTS FOR CONTROL OF POTATO STEM CANKER AND BLACK SCURF, 2004 W.W. Kirk and R.L. Schafer and D. Berry, P. Wharton and P. Tumbalam………………………………..……...…………..………..... 70 POTATO SEED PIECE AND VARIETAL RESPONSE TO VARIABLE RATES OF GIBBRELLIC ACID 2003-2004 Chris Long and Dr. Willie Kirk……………..……...…………..……….... 73 MANAGING RHIZOCTONIA DISEASES OF POTATO WITH OPTIMIZED FUNGICIDE APPLICATIONS AND VARIETAL SUSCEPTIBILITY; RESULTS FROM THE FIELD EXPERIMENTS. Devan R. Berry, William W. Kirk, Phillip S. Wharton, Robert L. Schafer, and Pavani G. Tumbalam………………….……….... 78 HOST PLANT RESISTANCE AND REDUCED RATES AND FREQUENCIES OF FUNGICIDE APPLICATION TO CONTROL POTATO BLIGHT (COOPERATIVE TRIAL QUAD STATE GROUP 2004) W.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Fries, Bakers, Tots, and Seed: Genetic Engineering and Varietal Selection
    Fries, Bakers, Tots, and Seed: Genetic Engineering and Varietal Selection Kate Binzen Fuller Dept. of Ag Econ and Econ Montana State University [email protected] 406-994-5603 Gary Brester Dept. of Ag Econ and Econ Montana State University Michael Boland Food Industry Center Applied Economics University of Minnesota Paper prepared for presentation at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association’s 2017 AAEA Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, July 30-August 1, 2017 Copyright 2017 by Kate Binzen Fuller, Gary Brester, and Michael Boland.. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. Fries, Bakers, Tots, and Seed: Genetic Engineering and Varietal Selection Genetic engineering, or the direct manipulation of an organism’s genome, has been a source of debate ever since the 1970s when scientists developed the first genetically modified organisms. More recently, Danny Hakim’s (2016) New York Times article “Doubts About the Promised Bounty of Genetically Modified Crops,” was followed by heated debate (e.g. Senapathy 2016). In particular, genetically engineered (GE) potato seed provides continued discussions with its pace of development and the introduction of new processes such as gene editing (Chang 2017). In March of 2017, commercial use of three new GE potato varieties was approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The new varieties have potential human health benefits over other potato varieties, resist browning and bruising, and also resist Late Blight, the disease that caused the Irish Potato Famine. If these new potato varieties are adopted, they would represent the first GE crop primarily consumed in a low-processed form in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Engineering and Risk in Varietal Selection Of
    GENETIC ENGINEERING AND RISK IN VARIETAL SELECTION OF POTATOES Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ajae/article-abstract/100/2/600/4840830 by Montana State University Library user on 04 September 2018 KATE BINZEN FULLER,GARY W. BRESTER, AND MICHAEL A. BOLAND The objective of this case study is to examine the farm management decision of whether to adopt a new, genetically engineered potato variety. We describe the potato supply chain from seed produc- tion to final consumer products and explore how price and production risk interact to influence deci- sion making at each link in that chain. We provide extensive supplemental material as well, including a teaching note with assignment and/or discussion questions, an introduction to and application of stakeholder theory, and a tool that assists students in calculating expected and simulated actual returns from their choice of potato variety. Key words: Agricultural pests and diseases, farm management decisions, genetic engineering, potatoes, risk analysis, seed production. JEL codes: Q12, Q13, Q16. Genetic engineering, or the direct manipula- engineered (GE) potato seed has fueled con- tion of an organism’s genome, has been a tinued discussions (Chang 2017). In March of source of debate ever since the 1970s when 2017, commercial use of three new GE potato scientists developed the first genetically mod- varieties was approved by the USDA. The ified organisms. More recently, Danny new varieties have potential human health Hakim’s (2016) New York Times article benefits over other potato varieties, resist “Doubts about the Promised Bounty of browning and bruising, and also resist Late Genetically Modified Crops,” was followed Blight, the disease that caused the Irish Potato by heated debate (e.g., Senapathy 2016; Famine.
    [Show full text]